The feminist view of breastfeeding

"elizabeth" wrote in news:1154989582.304770.140090
@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:


Mitchell Holman wrote:
"elizabeth" wrote in
news:1154893466.406728.285740
@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
snip
Well, it's a stupid CHOICE, because women who choose to stay home and
breed kids end up homeless and alone quite a bit. It's a loser's
game,
where you have no market value at all. In a capitalist society, such
women are beggars.


Whereas in a non-capitalist society they are....?

Women, and mothers in particular, actually had it much better in the
former Soviet Union. Women had the better treatment in Afghanistan
under the Soviets than they do now, even after we came there.

Because it's too expensive to raise children now

The mothers here seem to disagree with you.

Because of the huge subsidies they are getting from taxpayers now. And
every time you turn around, some moocow is squealing how they need
more, more for the schools, free daycare, free preschool, free
healthcare and housing available only to poor people who have children
they can't support (while poor people too responsible to breed children
they can't afford are dying on the streets).


Dying in the streets?



(because we've "overgrazed our range" and it takes more work to
provide
resources) taxpayers are expected to pay for more and more of the
costs
involved in raising children.

So? The future of our country is a good
investment.

Not anymore, since so many of these children can't function as soldiers
or scholars, and most of the jobs are outsourced or done by illegal
aliens.


So who do you expect to be caring for you in 40 years?



Because so many men CHOOSE to be
deadbeats and not support their children, we have more foster kids
than
ever, and less children being supported by their fathers.

So you hate mothers AND fathers.

People who choose to breed children they can't/won't care for are worse
than comtemptible. Children don't ask to be born, nor do taxpayers ask
to pay for other's contraception failures.


I don't mind paying for quality schools that
graduate qualified students that will be future of
the country. Why do you?


That means
the taxpayers pay for more of the parent's responsibilities. I'm also
****ing tired of all the crime and mess children create, like how it
costs SF at least 30 million a year just for graffitti clean up, we
have gangrapists in middle schools, and shootings at high schools are
common. All the breeders of those thugs CHOSE to have a child.

Perhaps you would refer no one to have any
children anywhere. That's going to make it tough
to find people to care for you in your dotage.

Nope, and who would care if no one bred any more children? Ray
Bradbury addressed that in _The Martian Chronicles_

If no one had kids for about 40 years, we could repair some of the
damage to the ecosystem, and be able to move the 80% of the world's
population that live on seacoasts to higher ground, since the oceans
are rising quite fast now.


If no one had kids for 40 year the American population
would vanish, to be replaced by Moslems and Mexicans. Is
that what you want?




If you breeders keep it up, your dotage
will be as Soylent Green, because the only use they will have for you
used up breeders is chow. Sperm and embryos can be stored for that
long, we already have the technology.

Besides, there are plenty of former breeders on the streets, and they
are dying off. No one is taking care of their dotage.


You really do hate everyone, don't you.......




What overpopulation? There are whole towns in
certain countries that have died because no one
is making babies. Every hear of negative popultion
growth? Look it up.

If you really think the world is underpopulated, you are insane.


If you think there will be an America after
40 years of no one having kids you are delusional.



True, white Europeans are not breeding as fast as the darker people of
the world, but we're already over 6 billion and closing in on 7
billion.


So you want the white people to stop breeding so
third world minorities can take over the planet. How
very generous of you.

Phyl wrote:
LaTreen Washington wrote:
Phyl wrote:

LaTreen Washington wrote:

Please show me a man that insists on the right to waste the company
dime to express milk for 2 30-minute periods per day.




Eh, they don't. They're too busy finding internet porn at work



The duhds do 'cause they won't/can't bang the cows they're married to.


Ah, good. So you agree that men are wasting time at work. That was E-Z.

--
Phyl

interesting remarks ...
Games i like to play
Morbidchild #369089
http://uc.gamestotal.com/?in=369089

"doomella" wrote in message
oups.com...


woman a slave to baby for years at a time, it's sad and it forever
truncates the woman's future

if the formulas aren't good enough, then by god, invent better formulas
but what is the point of technology if woman must be a slave forever?

the hole in woman's earning ability and future created by spending
years w. a kid attached to her boob is a hole that can never be
overcome


Oh good ****in' grief. Few normal women spend *years* with a "kid
attached to her boob" (in Western culture). As somebody who breastfed 2
kids for about 6 months each (and then gradually made the ol'
switcheroo to formula) I can say with great certainty that BFing a baby
in the middle of the night is a hell of a lot easier than getting up,
boiling water, measuring out formula, etc etc etc....

If women are so freaking busy and insecure and "enslaved" that they
can't do this for a few damn months then they shouldn't have babies.
Or they should just go for the formula and STFU. I have no problem with
women who choose not to breastfeed. But I have a huge problem with
women who make a huge sexist deal out of how they shouldn't be wasting
their precious time breastfeeding because it's "sexist"....

Idiotic!


Doomella:

I have to aggree with you. Too many wemen are being about sexist issue for
it to be exceptable. If they are uncomfortable about doing it, they
shouldn't have kids.
Loner

wrote:
I have seen several situations were mothers were made to feel
uncomfortable because they chose not to breast feed. I have also
encountered similar situations on the opposing side. I have to confess
that the advertising has laid the breastfeeding concepts on preety
thick latley. But that is media for you they are always distorting
things. Hey if someone feels the way that you do about Breastfeeding
then they should not breast feed, it would not be beneficial
emmotionally, and mentally. Which would inevitably negate the other
phisycal benefits.

Breast feeding allows the woman to nurse where ever whenever with no
bottles, formula, and less $ to worry about.......so why is that an
excuse to not work.


Woman are different from men. We have different gender roles to
fullfill that compliment each other. The feminist movment in the 20th
century was for womans rights not for denying your gender role. The
movement was so that we Woman would be treated as equals. That means
that woman no matter what age or activities they participate in should
be allowed the same rights as men.

In a healthy relationship the responsibilities are shared.
Breastfeeding should not excuse a father from responsibilites nor does
it limit the independance of the mother.Obviously if the mother decided
to walk away from her responsibilty to feed the child it would cause
detremental health issues but would it not then be the Fathers job to
step in and feed.

Breast feeding has many benefits, and you should cease the oppurtunity
when you have the chance. Look at it optimistically if you do not want
to then you can always feed formula. No one is denying your right to do
so. And now there are affordable pumps that are availible (or you can
do it by hand) so there is no excuse to ostercize yourself.

When I was breastfeeding my first I worked more then one job and went
to school fulltime. I had to give my child pumped milk a few times a
day but I was able to nurse her alot as well. Oh yeah I breastfed in
public to so kiss my ASS. and I am not ugly or fat., jerk. the nerve.

When it comes to feminism it is knowen that radical feminist would
desex all humans giving hysterectomies and visectomies. Give me a break
those people will be miserable forever if they do not learn how to
embrace their selves for who they are as individuals. Which would deny
them the ability to bare children as well. All births would be in
virtro test tube.....Lol. It is just funny how people always think that
they can improve things that are so perfect. It ends up being just an
ugly mess in the end.

Hey heres an idea why do we all not become communist clones?


God help us all. With that much use of the word "f*m*n*sm" in a post,
the soc.men tards are bound to show up.
Please, people. Scramble the word up, or use asterisks in it like I
just did so they can't search for posts with that word in them and
pollute other newsgroups with their flatulence.

wrote:
I really am curious why you are so frustrated with something that is an
option in the first place. Why do you not respect a womans rights?

That's a troll, love. It lives for attention.

elizabeth wrote:
snip
sure some unattractive "earth mothers" in the 60s breast fed but to
call them "progressive" because they were "hippies" is just silly,
since their ideals are anything but progressive -- their only concern
seemed to be a neurosis about food -- women who spend all their time
being mammals ain't going anywhere in this life or doing anything to
help uplift other women


Wow. Wish I'd said that. But that's why feminism failed--the moos
took it over, and it became all about middle class women getting poorer
women to do all their ****work. You can't have a union of scabs. The
men won't do the work, and so they dump all the **** on other women.

The mammal mamma sort of sow really hates the idea that she is what she
is, and must try to drag down all other women to her level. She
doesn't mind if women are harmed, as long as she's harmed less.
Breeders are beggars, and they have managed to go back to the idea that
the only women who matter are those who breed. The breeders-uber-alles
types all sound like Magda Goebbels, the UberSow of the Nazis, who was
crazier than a bat on acid from postpartum psychosis. She denounced
equity feminism, insisting that women have their sacred power from
breeding . .. it was all about Family Values there, too.

I say a woman should be judged on the content of her character, not the
contents of her womb. In an overpopulated world, these womben should
be seen as the absolute destroyers of civilization. It's a repeating
pattern in history, women being forced, coerced, or bribed to
overbreed, so the leaders have surplus population so they can have
enough young males to go to war, and that leaves all the excess young
females for the old men at home. But why bother learning history; it
just repeats itself.

You're a hypocrite of massive proportions. In your every post to this
thread, you've judged women by the contents of their wombs. You are
guilty of the reverse of the very thing you whine about.
It's sad, because you seem fairly intelligent and your posts are
coherent and literate. You're just blinded by a personal bias, no doubt
rooted in your own unfortunate life experience, that you dress up as an
ideology.
The posters who are saying you are bitter are correct. Your resentment
is clearly so intense as to be pathological. I have no position one way
or the other on this issue, so you can't take refuge in that tired old
"you're projecting" ploy.

~* Magda ~* wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 01:12:03 GMT, in alt.gossip.celebrities, Phyl
arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:

...
... I also think that another good way for breeders to
... look at their future is to visit a rest home and
... ask the residents there how often their children
... come to see them. Breeders of both genders seem
... to think that their kids will always love them
... unconditionally and will "take care of them when
... they're old."
...
...
... As opposed to the breedless, childless people who'll have tons of people
... to visit THEM?

At least they didn't waste tonnes of time and money to get to the same point as the
breeders... Et toc. LOL


Waste money? What are the breedless going to do with theirs after it's
sucked up by a nursing home? What will they do? Bury it with them?



--
Phyl

"Lefty" wrote

God help us all. With that much use of the word "f*m*n*sm" in a post,
the soc.men tards are bound to show up.
Please, people. Scramble the word up, or use asterisks in it like I
just did so they can't search for posts with that word in them and
pollute other newsgroups with their flatulence.

You mean like has already been done by crossposting this thread to
irrelevant newsgroups?

In article et,
Phyl wrote:

Waste money? What are the breedless going to do with theirs after it's
sucked up by a nursing home? What will they do? Bury it with them?

Live as fully as possible. Retire relatively rich, die broke.

Whatever's left over goes to the local library and various animal
groups. I suspect it'll do a lot more good than going to some underpaid
adult "grown child."

Ilene B

On 7 Aug 2006 15:35:17 -0700, elizabeth wrote:

JohnArbor wrote:
snip
Someone sounds barren and jealous.

Must be you, since this is a ng and you can't hear anything but your
own mutterings.


How clever. A nice little flame.



At least when you talk to yourself, you have someone
who won't laugh at you.


Q: Why dont angry lesbians have a sense of humor?

A: Thats not funny.